Summarize Whitechapel 180-197

This section of our book talks about the realities of documenting history through the addition or subtraction of editorials, the software, reenactments/replica, rendition, and any other action put forth on a documentary thats allows the viewer to reminisce about the subject, enabled to remember and contemplate it. Stallabrass uses these interviews with the creatives to further uphold the notion of the need for inclusivity in individual voices that comprise a collective fantasized community outlook. But the way the creator of the documentary makes the documentary, the way they edit, the history during the time they're filming, the context, the subject, the editorial, the effects; these all are constantly changing as time moves forward and history continues to be alive in the present moment we find ourselves in.
Stallabrass uses examples from creatives that infuse all kinds of materials and timely aspects into their works to relate them through the public, hopefully making it's way into individuals homes and mindsets and fostering positive connections between them and future generations to come. A big factor in this is how we learn to perceive and interpret media. One example is that all the editorial software available to us today is manipulating our ability to distinguish between reality and dream. It can also be an editorial technique used to center a viewers attention on the time, place, and quality of the video. In the jihadist videos that came out after 9/11, the quality of the video was made to seem as if the terrorists were not to strike again, transcribing this through screen by rendering the quality of the video to be of VCR quality. Another quality was described in the As Sahab videos in which all features of the camera were utilized; the night-vision, the bluetooth audio, etc. This allows the consumers of these videos to be fully immersed in the experience, and perhaps unwillingly coerced into being their visual consumers, creating a force by audience number and attention.
Another artist talked about reenactments and renditions of old media and history. The issue with this was that this dramatized the experience of the people who actually witnessed it. Recreating a witness of an event is still dramatized, no matter if you only get material from the persons who were there in the first place. The real reality is living in the present moment of the history of the people who know the in's and out's as much as they can in reality to the time difference of the event and the reenactment.
This leads into our main idea of factuals and how they change in accordance with time, culture, geography, people, presenter, audience, platform, medium, etc. etc. The way we present an argument or vision changes in the period we are in, and depends on a lot more factors than just straight facts to present. In an age where media is conditioning to the ways in which we percieve and accept information, I think the media of documentary has the power to become something so multifaceted that if done right, it could be the basis to a majority of our media references and relations in the future.